FANDOM


OverviewEdit

Any work of the scale of Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings movie screenplay was going to exhibit differences from the source material. While the three movies had a large number of minor and trivial differences from the book, there were quite a few substantial differences as well. These major differences take two forms—1. differences in form; this includes changes made to the story by deleting or adding parts or spreading ideas over a long period of time, and 2. differences in substance, which included changing actual ideas and people in the story to suit the film. Some such changes include the changing of almost all the characters and changing events to reach the same outcome as the book.

The director and writers of the motion pictures faced some significant challenges in bringing Tolkien's work to the big screen. Not the least of these was the enormous scale of the story. The Lord of the Rings is a very lengthy story that was, itself, derived from a fictional universe of prodigious dimensions. In it, an entirely original world of the author's manufacture forms the backdrop of a story with multiple intelligent races (Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, Ents and Men), their many languages and dialects, a highly developed historical narrative, and a minutely detailed geography of the world that had, itself, changed significantly over time. The result of all this is a level of complexity that is very difficult to apprehend in a screenplay. How does one go about presenting, for example, the historical background of a story that spans an enormous period of history that is outside the scope of the movie to be filmed? The difficulties the writers faced were innumerable, and many compromises to the story were required to successfully adapt it to the medium of film.

Soon after the release of the first movie, controversy began to arise over deviations in the screenplay from Tolkien's own story. Key characters such as Glorfindel and Tom Bombadil were absent, and substantial parts of the story were completely missing. Moreover, characters that were present, such as Elrond, Aragorn, and Gandalf, were substantially altered. The release of The Two Towers took this even further with deviations in character development and major plot elements becoming more significant. Finally, with the release of The Return of the King, more differences appeared and critical plot conclusions were either reduced or removed. The overall effect of the entire movie series was that it told a story that was recognizably that of Tolkien's, but it did so with major thematic and other differences. Reactions were mixed, with some fans becoming disappointed with the films,but others acceped the changes and loved the movies. These differences were not, however, of any importance to the movie's target audience— the enormous worldwide movie going public most of whom knew nothing of the story. Despite the differences, The Lord of the Rings motion pictures are beautiful and stunning epic movies that tell a great story in their own right.

The fact that the movies are a great achievement of movie-making is due, in part, to some of the changes that were required for screen adaptation. The most understandable differences in the screenplay from the story are those that were required to contract the duration of the film and keep up its pace. Even with substantial portions of the story excised in the screenplay, the three, extended-edition movies have a combined running time of well over eleven hours, and there is arguably enough material not filmed to make a fourth, extended-length motion picture. Considering the relative unimportance— to general audiences— of the missing material, it was probably a wise decision to not include it. Another important consideration in filming a motion picture is the pace at which the story moves. For example, the Council of Elrond is a lengthy episode in Tolkien's book, The Fellowship of the Ring, in which much historical material and explanations of off-camera events are provided. If this episode had been filmed as written, it probably would have run on over an hour and lost many viewers. Instead, the material was presented in a different way that kept the pace of the movie going along as was required for the medium.

Some differences between the story and the screenplay, however, are less easy to justify. Characters in the screenplay were developed very differently to those in the story, and they were made to do things that seemed contrary to their personalities. Moreover, major differences of theme exist— differences that do not seem to make sense or be entirely necessary for film adaption. For example, the result of the Entmoot in the movie was that the Ents decided not to go to war, but then the writers had them decide not to go to war, before Pippin gets treebeard to go south, saying the Hobbits will be safer that way, so Treebeard will see the ruin Isengard has caused, to get Ents to go to war anyway. It is fair to ask why they could not have just agreed to go to war in the film as they had in the book. Such differences, though unnoticeable to those who had never read the story, disappointed some fans of the book, while again other's did not mind. On the other hand, the film's creators stated that the scene had been added to make Pippin more than just useless baggage. In that context it succeeded.

Justification of Some ChangesEdit

The director and writers of the motion pictures faced some significant challenges in bringing Tolkien's work to the big screen. Not the least of these was the enormous scale of the story. The Lord of the Rings is a very lengthy story that was, itself, derived from a fictional universe of prodigious dimensions. In it, an entirely original world of the author's manufacture forms the backdrop of a story with multiple intelligent races (Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, Ents and Men), their many languages and dialects, a highly developed historical narrative, and a minutely detailed geography of the world that had, itself, changed significantly over time. The result of all this is a level of complexity that is very difficult to apprehend in a screenplay. How does one go about presenting, for example, the historical background of a story that spans an enormous period of history that is outside the scope of the movie to be filmed? The difficulties the writers faced were innumerable, and many compromises to the story were required to successfully adapt it to the medium of film.

Soon after the release of the first movie, controversy began to arise over deviations in the screenplay from Tolkien's own story. Key characters such as Glorfindel and Tom Bombadil were absent, and substantial parts of the story were completely missing. Moreover, characters that were present, such as Elrond, Aragorn, and Gandalf, were substantially altered. The release of The Two Towers took this even further with deviations in character development and major plot elements becoming more significant. Finally, with the release of The Return of the King, more differences appeared and critical plot conclusions were either reduced or removed. The overall effect of the entire movie series was that it told a story that was recognizably that of Tolkien's, but it did so with major thematic and other differences, which caused varying reactions among fans. These differences were not, however, of any importance to the movie's target audience— the enormous worldwide movie going public most of whom knew nothing of the story. Despite the differences, The Lord of the Rings motion pictures are beautiful and stunning epic movies that tell a great story in their own right.

The fact that the movies are a great achievement of movie-making is due, in part, to some of the changes that were required for screen adaptation. The most understandable differences in the screenplay from the story are those that were required to contract the duration of the film and keep up its pace. Even with substantial portions of the story excised in the screenplay, the three, extended-edition movies have a combined running time of well over eleven hours, and there is arguably enough material not filmed to make a fourth, extended-length motion picture. Considering the relative unimportance— to general audiences— of the missing material, it was probably a wise decision to not include it. Another important consideration in filming a motion picture is the pace at which the story moves. For example, the Council of Elrond is a lengthy episode in Tolkien's book, The Fellowship of the Ring, in which much historical material and explanations of off-camera events are provided. If this episode had been filmed as written, it probably would have run on over an hour and lost many viewers. Instead, the material was presented in a different way that kept the pace of the movie going along as was required for the medium.

Some differences between the story and the screenplay, however, are less easy to justify. Characters in the screenplay were developed very differently to those in the story, and they were made to do things that seemed contrary to their personalities. Moreover, major differences of theme exist— differences that in some peoples' opinions do not seem to make sense or be entirely necessary for film adaption.

In the end, the arguments boil down to opinion - which was better, the book or the movie? This wiki is not a place to express opinion, so the reader must decide for themselves.

Differences of FormEdit

Arrangement of Story ThreadsEdit

Tolkien's story was written in such a way that separate threads eventually emerge for the activities of the various characters. At one time, as many as four threads of the story existed. These threads were organized in such a way that multiple chapters could advance a single thread well along before switching to another. This is especially true of The Two Towers and The Return of the King. The first half of The Two Towers carried forward the events of the Fellowship in the lands of Rohan including the Battle of Helm's Deep, and the second half took Frodo through the Emyn Muil on his journey toward Mordor and ending with his imprisonment in the Tower of Cirith Ungol. The first half of The Return of the King then switches back to the West to tell of the war in Gondor through to the challenge of Sauron at the Black Gate by the lords of Gondor. This allows each thread to expand a substantial amount before switching into another thread.

In the movie, the threads are switched much more frequently, and this is probably a necessity of the medium. One could easily forget the plight of one character while spending much time with another. Moreover, the synchronicity of events was much easier to follow with the frequent switching than it would have been had the screenplay been written as the book. This was definitely a case in which the medium dictated the form.

Timeline Changes Edit

LOTRtimeline

Timeline suggested, positing that there is a one year gap instead of 17 years between Bilbo's 111st birthday and Fellowship.

Frodo's age during Fellowship of the Ring is considerably younger in the film versus the book. In the book he starts his quest at 50, 17 years after Bilbo's 111th birthday and the passing of the One Ring from Bilbo to Frodo. In the film, this gap does not appear to exist, while there is time between the party and Gandalf's reappearance, Frodo's appearance suggests that it is very clearly not 17 years-- while in the book, the Ring prevents its keeper from aging, this effect was not seen with Bilbo, who appears quite a bit older at his party than when he finds the Ring. The film also positions Merry and Pippin as age-contemporaries to Frodo and Sam, a dynamic not seen in the book, where they are quite a bit younger (where Merry is 36 and Pippin is 28). This timeline shift of the trilogy alters other aspects of the film verse timeline, such as the birth year of Aragorn, since he states his age, 87, in Return of the King to Eowyn. (Book Birth 2931 VS Movie Birth 2916)

This change is significant because it explains Thranduil's words to Legolas at the end of Battle of the Five Armies. In the book timeline, Aragorn was only 10 at this time, meaning he was still living in Rivendell and had yet to take up the name Strider. With the revised timeline, Aragorn is 25 during BoFA, five years after he left Rivendell, but 2 years before he goes to fight for Gondor and Rohan, a time when he was living with the Dunedain. This change connects these two film moments into a clear logical timeline.

Missing MaterialEdit

Of a total of sixty-two chapters in the three-volume book set, little to none was filmed from nine of them. These are indicated in red. Another thirty-one chapters had substantial portions left out of the screenplay. These are indicated in blue. The Remaining twenty-two chapters—less than half of the total—had most or all of their material included. These are indicated in green.

The Lord of the Rings
The Fellowship of the Ring The Two Towers The Return of the King
A Long-expected PartyThe Departure of Boromir†Minas Tirith
The Shadow of the PastThe Riders of RohanThe Passing of the Grey Company
Three is CompanyThe Uruk-haiThe Muster of Rohan
A Short Cut to MushroomsTreebeardThe Siege of Gondor
A Conspiracy Unmasked*The White RiderThe Ride of the Rohirrim*
The Old Forest*The King of the Golden HallThe Battle of the Pelennor Fields
In the House of Tom Bombadil*Helm's DeepThe Pyre of Denethor
Fog on the Barrow Downs*The Road to Isengard‡The Houses of Healing
At the Sign of the Prancing PonyFlotsam and JetsamThe Last Debate
StriderThe Voice of Saruman‡The Black Gate Opens
A Knife in the DarkThe Palantír‡The Tower of Cirith Ungol
Flight to the FordThe Taming of SmeagolThe Land of Shadow
Many MeetingsThe Passage of the MarshesMount Doom
The Council of ElrondThe Black Gate is ClosedThe Field of Cormallen
The Ring Goes SouthOf Herbs and Stewed RabbitThe Steward and the King
A Journey in the DarkThe Windows on the WestMany Partings*
The Bridge of Khazad-dûmThe Forbidden PoolHomeward Bound*
LothlórienJourney to the Crossroads‡The Scouring of the Shire*
The Mirror of GaladrielThe Stairs of Cirith Ungol‡The Grey Havens
Farewell to LórienShelob's Lair‡ 
The Great RiverThe Choices of Master Samwise‡ 
The Breaking of the Fellowship  

† - Chapter moved to The Fellowship of the Rings Film
‡ - Chapter moved to The Return of the King Film

* - Not In The Movie

Note: This table is likely to elicit some controversy, so further explanation is in order. The table is intended to show the relative amount of each chapter that appeared somewhere in the three movies. For example, none of the material of 'The Shadow of the Past', which is chapter 2 of The Fellowship of the Ring, appears at that place in the movie. Instead, all of its material is spread out in various places throughout the three movies. Much the same could be said for 'The Council of Elrond'. Decisions about color-coding were based on rough percentages. Red is used when less than about 10% of the material from the chapter appeared in the final, extended-edition movie. Blue is used for up to about 66%. And green is used for more than 66%. In some cases, such as 'The Departure of Boromir', the material was just shifted from one film to another.


Differences of SubstanceEdit

Councilofelrond

The neutrality of this article or section is disputed.
See this article's talk page to discuss.

"Difference in Substance" refers to the change of whole scenes, places and/ or characters. While some of these changes seem trivial they can have a giant effect when all combined together.

Changes in CharacterEdit

In the films, most characters were changed from the book to suit the film's plot-line or to make the characters more likable or dislikable. Some of these changes included making a truthful character a liar, making a kind character a villain, a determined character falling into doubtfulness or even reducing wise lords into raving lunatics. These were all changes made to characters to humanise them and make them more easily understood by people who had only watched the movie and not read the books.

GandalfEdit

In the book, Gandalf is described to be a self-possessed and calculating wizard with full trust in the Valar's workings. However, in the movies he is seen to be more worried and more panic-stricken which humanises him as a character. Throughout the movie he progresses and becomes more like his description as given in the book, which fits the humanisation of him as humans ideally learn from their errors. It also makes sense that being in human form also makes Gandalf susceptible to things such as doubt. These changes from panic-stricken to confident occur right after he is sent back by the Valar to accomplish his purpose after defeating the Balrog which fits the idea of total rebirth. But in the film Gandalf is still shown to be weaker than in the book. One example is his defeat at the hands of the Witch-King only to be saved by the Rohirrim while in the books he is shown to ride to the gates of Minas Tirith to confront the Witch-king by himself. This lowers Gandalf's strength as he is said to be a Maia while the Witch-King is essentially just a human ring-bearer. It is a strange inconsistency given Gandalf's triumph over the Balrog, not to mention the various spells he has used throughout the films, some of which may have been useful in such a scenario.

To some, this change was unjustified considering Gandalf is not human, however, Tolkien did write that the Istari were subject to the cares and wants of humanity while in human form.

ElrondEdit

One of the few remaining Noldorin lords in Middle-earth, Elrond, who is over 6,500 years old according to the book, is there described as being "fair of face as an Elven Lord, as venerable as a king of Dwarves, as strong as a warrior, as wise as a wizard, and as kind as summer." He is also Aragorn's foster-father, and has agreed that if he can prove himself worthy by becoming king of Gondor and defeating Sauron, Aragorn may marry Arwen.

In the film, meanwhile, Elrond has despaired of all hope and has lost confidence in Men. His attitude is one of capitulation, and his purpose therefore is simply to quit Middle-earth with as many of his people as possible. His opposition to the marriage between his daughter and Aragorn is taken to the extreme of deceit to prevent her from remaining in Middle-earth. It is only when he fears her outright death that he orders Narsil reforged and then delivers it to Aragorn in person. This is understandable, given that Elrond's wife has already left Middle Earth, and Elrond does not wish to lose his daughter. Throughout the screenplay, Elrond is deeply scornful of men. Isildur's fall was, to his mind, the fall of all Men, and he lacks any confidence in any Man or group of Men save the honor of that kindred.

In a sense, Elrond himself has fallen. His fears dominate him until near the end of the screenplay, and his possessiveness of Arwen leads him to perpetrate a deception upon her. Knowing of her intent to forsake the immortal life and wed Aragorn, he deceives her by willfully withholding crucial information from her while convincing her to break fealty and abandon her betrothed. It took the intervention of the Valar to prevent the success of his deceit. In the end, he surrenders to the inevitable, but in this, too, his demeanor is one of capitulation. Nevertheless, he is visibly pleased as he watches Arwen wed Aragorn, and is content when he is seen at the Grey Havens.

AragornEdit

A man presented by Tolkien as having a singular destiny for which he is prepared by Elrond and toward which he labours throughout his life, the movie version of Aragorn had many more doubts about himself and his ancestry.

This is reflected in the movie in both his apperance and behavior. The most noticeable change in Aragorn is his size; Tolkien writes that Aragorn is at least 6'6" tall, almost a full foot taller than in the film.

Aragorn is also very "keen and commanding" in the book, being possessed of an indomitable will so powerful that Sauron fears him, and "even the shades of men are subject to his will." In stark contrast, movie-Aragorn spends much of his time bowing, and otherwise lowering himself; and accordingly, in the movie Sauron never fears Aragorn having the Ring, but only wants to stop him claiming the kingship.

Rather than his love becoming his source of strength and hope, movie-Aragorn's love for Arwen becomes a weight around his neck, almost literally because of the jewel necklace she had given him. He is full of fears and self-doubt, and he is unwilling to embrace the destiny that had been pronounced over him at birth. He is named Estel, that is 'hope', by the Elves, but he is far from being the hope that they are expecting. But buried deep there may be a small fraction of hope. Just before the battle of Helm's Deep, he says "There is always hope".

Aragorn had previously suggested to Arwen that she take advantage of her chance for a better life in the Undying Lands, and he later tells Galadriel that he would have her take the ship to Valinor, which is possibly a reflection of the doubt he suffers in the movie. In the story, Aragorn's destiny drives him as much as his love for Arwen, but in the movie, it seems that he would have Arwen without the kingship if he could.

In the movie, Aragorn is portrayed as alone in the world without kith or kin, but in the story he has dozens of kindred, at least, among the Dúnedain, and the sons of Elrond were his especially close friends - essentially they are his foster-brothers. (Note: Elladan and Elrohir, the sons of Elrond, do not appear in the movie.) In the screenplay, Aragorn takes the Paths of the Dead with only Legolas and Gimli, but in the story they are joined by thirty others including the sons of Elrond and one other named man, Halbarad. In the book Aragorn is not shown as having the skill with horses he has in the movies; rather, it is Legolas who has this Elvish way with the horses of Rohan.

When Aragorn challenges Sauron with the Palantír: far from wrestling it to his will, as he did in the story, he seems to be defeated by Sauron instead. The jewel of Arwen is destroyed, which signifies the loss of her immortal life, and he is thrown back a defeated man. In the story, his use of the Palantír to reveal himself to Sauron is a brilliant stroke that accomplishes Aragorn's purpose: Sauron is terrified by the sight of the blade that had once defeated him, and he believes that Aragorn has defeated Saruman, and taken the palantir - and thus the Ring - for himself! Sauron's doubts and fears thus cause him to miscalculate his preparedness for war, and launch his offensives prematurely. Unlike in the movies, Aragorn never despairs even when his doubts and fears are at their height.

Aragorn's nobility in the films is markedly reduced in some cases as he has no qualms about murdering an emissary in cold blood, for instance.

FrodoEdit

Like Aragorn, Frodo also presents a much-weakened version of the book-character, who is the nephew and pupil of Bilbo, and so is a hobbit-lord who is wealthy and educated, schooled in Elvish lore and all-round adventuring. He is described by Gandalf as "a stout little fellow with red cheeks, taller than some, fairer than most," and "a perky chap with a bright eye," and showing a fondness for food, poetry and general merriment, as well as being middle-aged. In the movie he is quite the opposite of this, being quite young and somewhat frail, glassy-eyed and sullen.

Frodo also resisted the power of the Ring much longer than most others could, was depicted as succumbing to it much more rapidly and was almost completely overmastered by the time he had reached Ithilien. Of his interrogation by Faramir in the book, he could say, "I have told you no lies, and of the truth all I could," while in the screenplay, he told a bald and brazen lie about "the Gangrel creature" that had been seen with him. Even under the strongest influence of the Ring, Frodo never lied in the story.

While it is true that Frodo is eventually so overcome by the power of the Ring that Sam must drive, and eventually carry, him on the Quest, the screenplay causes the loss of his will much more quickly and thoroughly. By the time they reach the top of The Stairs of Cirith Ungol, his wits are so completely scrambled that he does the unthinkable and forsakes Sam on the Quest, believing Gollum's lies. This is one of the most unacceptable plot changes to Tolkien fans because the friendship between Frodo and Sam is the solid road on which the Quest is driven; nor would Frodo be so foolish as to trust Gollum. At no time does Frodo turn on Sam in this way in the book.

Ultimately, Frodo shows no character-depth of wisdom in the movie as in the book, where he grows greatly from his experiences - to the point that even Saruman shows him great respect and admiration - but also sad and wounded to the point where he must leave the Shire forever, showing that nothing comes without a price. In the film, however, Frodo is vastly weakened from in the book; and, like the Shire, he remains relatively unchanged by the war; his journey to Valinor is without apparent cause.

SamEdit

Tolkien regarded Sam to be the "chief hero" of the story,[1] and his role was a key one in driving the Quest to completion. The screenplay, however, has Sam actually abandoning his master at a moment of highest danger—a moment where, in the book, came a very tender and poetic scene of the story in which Sméagol was very nearly reformed. (in the movie version, Sam was seen walking down the stairs, crying until he accidentally slipped and fell to a cliff where he found the remains of the Lembas Smeagol threw away. Angered, he looked up the stairs). He did not have to do so, however, because Frodo and Sam entered the tunnel of Shelob together in the book, and they fought the terror of Cirith Ungol together—until, of course, Gollum attacked Sam from behind, and so Frodo was overcome by Shelob. Aside from this, Sam was depicted rather faithfully that one wonders why the screenwriters felt the need to deviate so drastically at this crucial moment of the story. This is explained in the DVD extras, where the filmmakers tell how they felt that Gollum should achieve some credibility as an active villain, in causing a rift between Frodo and Sam; however in reality this simply exacerbates Frodo's overall weakness and unsuitability as both the Ring-bearer and the protagonist.

FaramirEdit

Faramir is a widely loved character in Tolkien's story. This is due to his wisdom and purity of heart that makes him a great leader and an excellent judge of difficult matters; it is also stated that this is due to the "blood of Numenor" running truer in him (and Denethor) than in Boromir, and which Sam likens to reminding him of Gandalf. Despite his love for his brother Boromir, he is his exact opposite; the Ring had no purchase on him, and he understood its danger, and that it must not come near the White City. He and his men treated Frodo and Sam with courtesy and honor; and even Gollum, when he was captured, received only fairness, and is set free to go with Frodo. Faramir is so wise, in fact, that he realizes that the Ring only came into his grasp as a test of his quality, by some higher power; and he answers that not only would he never take the Ring from Frodo, but that he would not have taken it even if he had found it himself. In the movie, meanwhile, Faramir is so opposite his book-character, that he actually sees himself proving "his quality" by taking the Ring, rather than refusing it.

A major departure in the movies is that, rather than assist Frodo and Sam on their quest, Faramir decides to send the Ring back to Minas Tirith, crossing the Anduin and forcing a dubious detour into the journey. However, while tempted by the Ring, he never attempts to claim it for himself. While Boromir tries to take it to defend his country himself, Faramir intends that the Ring would be a gift for his father (although the temptation seems as harsh as it was on Boromir. In the movie version, Faramir, tempted by the Ring, intended to gain personal glory by taking the Ring to Minas Tirith). He also does not react with anger when Frodo refuses to give him the Ring.

A point of confusion likewise erupts when Faramir calls Frodo to the roof of Henneth Anun to ask whether his archers should shoot Gollum; in the book, Faramir already knows about the Ring at this point, and trusts Frodo implicitly; in the movie, meanwhile, Frodo is still Faramir's prisoner at this point, and therefore would have no reason to trust Frodo or ask his advice.

The fact that Faramir and his men brutalized Gollum is another major change from his character in the book, and does not really match his character in the movie either. This is somewhat incongruous to the man that we see in the scenes with his brother. While Faramir's taking the Ring to Osgiliath may be explained by the desire of the screenwriters to have Faramir "grow" in his understanding, as well as create suspense, there is no explanation given for the brutality that he exhibits.

Finally, in the movie Faramir obeys Denethor unerringly, and seeks his approval; in the movie, meanwhile, he defies Denethor, and says that he would never give the Ring to him (in the book, it is Gandalf who says these words, since Gandalf refused the ring himself). However, strangely, Faramir obeys Denethor's request to lead a pointless suicide-run on Osgiliath while Denethor gorges himself at Minas Tirith (in the book, Faramir only loses a third of his company, and the mission was to slow the advance of Grond on the Pelennor, which saved the city; and Denethor likewise watched the battle and launched a sortie from the walls of Minas Tirith to save Faramir's company on its return).

It is likely that these scenes were given to us for the development of Gollum in the film. [In an interview, Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh stated that they changed Faramir's character to fit with the overwhelming power of the Ring. In the books he is impervious to the Ring's power, Faramir had the potential to take the all powerful Ring which corrupts all, and he didn't. The screenplay writers decided that to corrupt Faramir, would fit into the nature of the Ring better.]

DenethorEdit

Instead of Tolkien's wise and mighty Lord of Men, with great powers of mind and wisdom, who had simply been overwhelmed by despair, Denethor is turned into an imbecile and madman -- most likely to make the changes to the primary characters look better in comparison. In him, nobility is reduced to premature and artificial senility. It might be argued that this was done so that there would be no ambivalence about Aragorn's takeover, but the degree and tone of these changes borders on the farcical. For example, to plunge from the Embrasure Denethor would have had to run up two levels and entirely across the city, all the while burning to death. While Denethor was stated in the book to have aged prematurely from his battles with Sauron via the Palantir, Gandalf himself remarks to Denethor that "when you are a dotard, you will die;" and likewise in the film Denethor doesn't have a palantir.

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.